Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution of complexity/information
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 11 of 254 (41712)
05-29-2003 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ex_YEC_Er
11-21-2002 2:13 AM


312
I am still looking for a better discusion of the TWO laws than Wolfram's simply physical notion that optimality ONLY applies to averages of molecular motions and not to the free path's themselves. Till then it seems one simply need indicate the MILTARY assocation of the gene coding concepts and indicate that action a distance (even if one does not want as with Wolfram to consider what Collet did not understand that Thom thought was wrong about US physics decimal placing places...) As for KELVIN temps and the 2nd law that is probably a specious c/e attempt to decieve the darling clemintine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ex_YEC_Er, posted 11-21-2002 2:13 AM Ex_YEC_Er has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 16 of 254 (41853)
05-31-2003 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Silent H
05-30-2003 1:10 PM


Actually more than potential
Last Fall I put together much of the contents of a book I was going to write which purpose was to DEFINE homology for all use in panbiogeography and ALL literature (cladistics etc) related to it by reviewing Pascal's essay on geometry and thinking about Pensees etc etc thus to actually DEFINE THIS WORD FOR ABSOLUTE use (by connection to the NONexistent claim in set theory of absolute infinity though actual) but THE REASON I had thought this would help EVEN any probalistic evolution work was that I had been lead in the subjetive side of herpetology to have a 3-D antatomical frame from which any physics could be metrically attached in the future of modeling say even with rxn diffusion questions vertebrate color patterns in a computer.
You indeed did address the topic of this thread but I will say again that I think for the probabilitic use of relation of cause and correlation IT WOULD BE STILL POSSIBLE to write such a book for biogeography only I now see the need for this only from the evolutionists' desire to have more evolution taught and not by what was not taught in biology about the time the change amount occurs in.
I am amlost at the point of claiming actually there IS absoultely something in biology (but I need a better impression of mechanics and not geometry before I reiefy this next into some canonical status)that potential sheets of Maxwell under his own notion of pressure WIHTIN what it was that made him think was a relation of light and e-m but ONLY IN TERMS OF MUTATIONS and not "the parent form" is an acutal expression of an absolute (no more Fisher criticism would be possible if it IS absolute and not just me to be claiming it is..)Sewall Wright Effect on the nano and up scale of Boscovich's DEAD FORCES which according to the last named only result in velocity differences which would afford molecular biology a means to WORK with molecular adapations in addition to that selected by death of whole organisms by a heirarchical selection that would found the entropy-cell death correlation by FORMS of negentropy ASSYMETRICAL intervals by molecuarl embryology of the symmetry. The consequences for Kimura view based on this being true, I have not even begun to speculate the base therefore... This would be an absolute in THEORETICAL BIOLOGY just as absolute as the language I used to come to this truth (if true) has 26 letters. I would not find analogy to language useful for the "evolution" of the information on complexity in life helpful but would remand with Lammerts that geneticaly there is MORE info than is transmitted in this communication of x-ray chageable insults on the soma etc. A new basis for the phenomena of disease would on instance result and that would make it practically infinite abosultely if not absotulty infinte in the praxis which would be enough for all but the theologians as the secular skin of the pyramind would also likely become defined even if I choose not to define "homology" anymore. It is simply a matter of reading and understanding so far. Next to continue will be the visual proof of the same.
When you say "buy into" is that becuase you would not vote for a politicain in NEw Jersey or do you mean something other than some garden variety stated "equivocation"? I simply had to change the NEtwork channel between Philly and NYC abeit I saw C-o lake rarely...
[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 05-31-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Silent H, posted 05-30-2003 1:10 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 19 of 254 (41919)
06-01-2003 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Peter
06-01-2003 10:16 AM


annalogy vs homology and the info it contains
Pete. the intereseting thing is that I do not asume this desgin print but unlike Lewontin I DO not think that velocity, mass and distance are only analogy biologically. There is a difference here that IS HARD to explicate but it seems that there is only generally the bipolarity of thought you indicated.
Lewontin says this because he knows that bioforms are chunkier than physcio-chem but still in biogeography DISTANCE IS the main datatype. Since I have been on the net I have been streesing velocity and soon i will start to write about mass when it comes to Mendelism more by equality than not still there must be some DESIGN of these physical quantities biologically but stocasticism IS NOT ruled out in the HOMOLOGY whatever it is..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Peter, posted 06-01-2003 10:16 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Peter, posted 06-02-2003 7:39 AM Brad McFall has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 21 of 254 (41964)
06-02-2003 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Peter
06-02-2003 7:39 AM


Re: annalogy vs homology and the info it contains
That's fine, philosophically with me. Richard Boyd ALWAYS talks about 'emergence' and yet I had in writing with his consent to work on DOWNWARD CAUSATION in whatever of this "emerges" which for me was just a word like JD MUrray's who said in Oxford, your area, that I could "SEE" (there) what "developmental" biology I would be doing. I DID NOT WANT TO SEE THIS, for choosing this kind of biology I wanted to 'develop' it like one does a negative and not see it first and then explain it.
I do understand this point I never have not. Simon Levin at one point INSISTED that I see Hutchinson @Yale before he would passed on for I did think a while about the notion of NICHE and tricycle sizes produced in manufacturing as expresing the barb relations in mosquito bills but this line of thinking failed even to raise Boyd's "emergent" evolutionary mind a decade latter which was about 2 years ago. Thanks again. and God Bless Scotland yard long.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Peter, posted 06-02-2003 7:39 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Peter, posted 06-05-2003 10:15 AM Brad McFall has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 23 of 254 (42175)
06-05-2003 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Peter
06-05-2003 10:15 AM


Re: annalogy vs homology and the info it contains
On this we likely agree. Which all the more indicates to me that some kind of c/e colloboration IS possible to benefit the whole of science. I have never thought otherwise.
Likely, we would need an extended dissucsion of the "evolution" of dominance to ferret out any extenuating differences which once informed should still even if insitutionally ejected should not attract third party doctors into involuntary capitulation. For one I have been surprised that not more press has been given to Galton's notion and use of the Ogive curve. It looks to me prima facie to be at least an a priori form to make a better statistical refinement of the data coming out of genomics into but obviously an empirical base of the resultant would be preferred not matter what output is pretext to invent the device of data collection of the collections already biologically collected.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Peter, posted 06-05-2003 10:15 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Peter, posted 06-13-2003 8:02 AM Brad McFall has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 25 of 254 (42878)
06-13-2003 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Peter
06-13-2003 8:02 AM


Re: annalogy vs homology and the info it contains
I dont know if any different view (Dawkins? etc ??) can be extracted from the difference between the similiarity of our agreement to agree as I agree I have always thought that "folds"=issue of denaturation was exiciting and now that Sheraga from Cornell is overseeing the Bufflao Bioinformatics Divsion that Clinton pumped we can hope indeed that benefits instead of Gould's claim to head hunter natural selection as having been sufficient for encompassing the INFORMATION in biochange that is not the DNA itself as we said and I DID at first blush think, but I have expanded this notion from Richard Boyd sugggesting I *actually* (as opposed to debating) think of downward causation to which folding is not the only exemplar of the non-informatic sense or lack of chemistry to be able to be carrier of cross generational information...so not being a biochemist either I can only say at this place we agree. That was the good news.
The application and hence CHOICE of what to do with genomic data in order to get a better coordination before some Fisher/Fordite changes the employment of natural selection as to the entrenched organicist however is really a bit arbitary. I was only suggesting it because it occured in the history of biometry and not in the history of natural philosphy per say but in order to show to the issue of regulation I would indeed likely have to START to discuss dominance (which i , BSM have not on the web really done much with..) in the context of my Grandfather's PhD. in the effect of temperature on wing length in vestigial, while elucidating some of the connections that Gould may have thought destablizing the homeostasis of stablizing selection by critcizing the Russian contribution in morphogeny in spite of the Frech advance...and AT THE SAME TIME indicating some other (I know not what topologically)...oops I started to think in molecular terms...
There may be constructive uses of DNA in the sense of it as a blueprint IN THE LANGUAGE of biology but that indeed IS NOT what you said. Once again. We do agree to some generational sense on this. Thanks again it is refreshing to finally start to actually talk about biology on the net instead of being only "freinds" to Tom, Dick, Harry and the three Stoges.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Peter, posted 06-13-2003 8:02 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Peter, posted 06-23-2003 11:22 AM Brad McFall has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 230 of 254 (164352)
12-01-2004 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by Peter
12-01-2004 8:53 AM


Re: DNA Doesn't Make Proteins?
Hey Peter,
You said;
Proteins don't build organisms ... they react chemically
with other compounds, elements and proteins.
But consider this:
In the 90s I was working for
Animal Science | CALS
On the Cause of cellblock in invitro fertilization reimplants of cows
& it was KNOWN that the metaphase plate looked different for rats,than cows than humans. In order probe the cell cycle it was necessary to have some components/elements STABLE across the reproductive connection and I proposed that CENTRIOLES might be markers to standardize various chemical treatments on AS MICROTUBULES maintain as proteins their own dynamics independent of the kind. In other words it might IN FACT be true that proteins in the information necessary to kinetically reassociate centrioles generation after generation, while not necessarily carried by the DNA as information carrier, would with respect to differences in the kinds, possibly maintain this information in the place of metaphase plate differences which this lab was purporting as the possible reason that cells block at different stages in different animals.
In this sense, if true, the proteins WOULD BUILD some factor relevant to the DIFFERENCE IN SHAPES of the metaphase plates which might or might not have been causal with cellblock(failure to divide) timeings ,no matter the state of the cell-cycle. I never got to finish this work because of personal reasons but I had other labs prepared to start developing computer simulations, necessary to carry on the work from 1991-2. And since the metaphase plates were indicative of large brush mammal taxonomy, then--therefore, I see no reason to PRESUME that "proteins DONT build organisms". If they build the ability to associate with MATERNAL chemicals then they build sans sex, the individual development within a law of growth(if).
This shows up the issue of information necessary to make a form and the form's self-assembly. The independent dynamic activity of mictrobules could concievably maintain a structure invariance FROM WHICH chemicals react, but insofar, as, a particular taxon provided THE ENVIRONMENT, to maintain the kinematics of the CLASS of PROTEINS (alpha vs beta etc), it would still be THE SPECIES that has proteins building iTS body rather than some Turing's chemical rxns diffusion equation set up for only for a given sex biased case in the exception.
I am going to be sticking with Gladyshev's
quote:
"The energy-consuming chemical substances formed as a result of the effect of solar energy (or other external energy sources) are, in the final analysis, transfomed, by the operation of the second law of thermodyanmics into thermodynamically stable (in the conditions of the Earth) compounds, CO2, N2, H2O, and others. Living systems, as it were, obstruct the achievement of chemical equilibrium by forming higher hierarchical structures, e.g., supramolecular structures, cells and organisms, as a result of the spontaneous process of thermodynamic self-organization (self-assembly). This slackens up the establishment of chemical equilibrium at all hierarchical levels and can be explained in terms of the phenomenon of structural stablization and the principle of stability of matter."
IN PROGRESS IN REACTION KINETICS, "Thermodyanmic Self-Organization As A Mechanism of Hierarchical Strucutre Formation of Biological Matter" Vol 28 pp157-188,2003 @
http:20 – ’‘
with respect to his
quote:
However, up to now the theory of biological evolution did not attempt to point out the physical essence of the evolutionary trend, although Ch.Darwin admitted that the principles of life are a part or a consequence of some general law determining the evolution of matter as a whole.

generalized (see
http://www.endeav.org/evolut/text/mf/index.htm
)
This implies for instance that lichens on the north and south sides of tree trunks IN THIS SLACKNESS (as to the trend op. cit.) would be predicted to show higher melting points for
http://www.unizh.ch/.../Cyto_Website/dudlerLab/pdf/ssfgb.pdf
than on the north side.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
You/One is-are free, to try to interpret the word "slackening trend" some other way; but unless it was KN::WN that oncosis and apoptosis WERE inherent here, I can hear of no other way I know! The point is that it might be due to thermodyanmic "demand" rather than a heritibility in a lineage constuitively. Did you ever get the idea that Turing proposed his wholly chemical view of form BECAUSE rather than as a result of him being a homosexual? The relation is that the higher hierarchy ALSO is in continuum with reproduction whether or not this is recognizable as a transfinite domain. This is not possible possibly if only the sex involved is focused on on. I do not know specifically what this demands linguistically but itis irrespective of language, spoken by US.
There is an exciting possiblity opening up intellectually that WHAT Croizat OBSERVED in organic distributions (claimed by New Zelanders' TO HAVE BEEN minimal spanning trees WERE the RESULT of minimzations obeying Gladyshev's law.
Universidade Federal do Paraná
It is quite plausible to attempt a correlation between the increase in the degree of vertex in biogegraphic plots of collections localities
http://www.people.vcu.edu/~gasmerom/MAT131/mst.html
ON EARTH and the INTERVALS' LENGTH of strong inequalities from the DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS OF MACROTHERMODYNAMICS.
http://www.endeav.org/evolut/age/dem/dem.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------
The crucial point to comprehend is where Georgi said (in the first cite of GPG's here), "Thus, it was established that in ontogenesis (or phylogenesis), the specific Gibbs function of the formation of supramolecular structures of an organism's tissues (SYMBOL), tends to a minimum:
INTEGRAL EQUATED TO SAID Mediating SYMBOL OMITTED (2)
Where"..."Let us note that Eqn(2) implies taking account of all supramolecular interactions in all hierarchical bio-tissue structures (intracellular, intercellular and others). This is fully justified because the structural hierarchy does not always coincide with the temporal hierarchy."Page166.
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-02-2004 10:46 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Peter, posted 12-01-2004 8:53 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by Peter, posted 12-03-2004 5:15 AM Brad McFall has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 232 of 254 (164846)
12-03-2004 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by Peter
12-03-2004 5:15 AM


Re: DNA Doesn't Make Proteins?
It may be only that but we would need a better thermo DYNAM ics in applied biophysics. I was trying to keep seperate notions of protein motion and 3-D structure from possible infolded thermodynamic demand as mentioned by Gladyshev. So, while some Cornell researchers in the 80s when trying to figure out how the ribosome functions determined it was not how strong a bond was but rather if the bond was the first to form that mattered these issues might be DIFFERENTIALLY "recorded" over historical time AMONG DNA, RNA, and PROTEIN such that no matter what the protein interaction might be the information might be unfoldable ONLY from the the relation of DNA to RNA say such that what at first mattered in the first instance but as to the protein minimizing something latter it might have been the strength that determines what chemicals efficiently interact and thus would have been selectable if not selected for previously but only randomnly becoming a part of a lineage. I think it is necessary to keep the notion of possible interference with the genetic appartus clear for a time until people really understand it before it might be asserted to be just another understanding in genetics itself.
The relation of the metaphase plate shape to taxogeny indeed is spurious at best but that is what I was being paid$ to think about at Cornell. It was however quite striking to see taxonomic differences at the level of the baramin by looking INSIDE a cell rather than seeing the differences in a MUSEUM. The reductionist protocols of the animal scientists were not prepared to make the relationships I hinted at which were day to day being done down Tower Road in the dept of ecology, evolution, and systematics. I only tried to give a slightly broader understanding to the research. The consequence of the above post however does continue in my direction as the minimizations might be related to the Banach-Tarski paradox, minimal spanning trees, Gladyshev laws,and baramin GENETIC discontinuity. More on that in its proper thread later. All the Best, Brad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Peter, posted 12-03-2004 5:15 AM Peter has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by TheLiteralist, posted 12-04-2004 3:48 PM Brad McFall has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 241 of 254 (165591)
12-06-2004 8:51 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by TheLiteralist
12-04-2004 3:48 PM


Re: DNA Doesn't Make Proteins?
I had said in post#11
I am still looking for a better discusion of the TWO laws than Wolfram's simply physical notion that optimality ONLY applies to averages of molecular motions and not to the free path's themselves. Till then it seems one simply need indicate the MILTARY assocation of the gene coding concepts and indicate that action a distance (even if one does not want as with Wolfram to consider what Collet did not understand that Thom thought was wrong about US physics decimal placing places...) As for KELVIN temps and the 2nd law that is probably a specious c/e attempt to decieve the darling clemintine.
BUT I AM NO LONGER LOOKING!
My test will be that evos MUST be supposing the minimization of STEINER TREES rather than SPANNING trees as to any correlation between the Gibbs' minimzation and an induced biogeography that need no longer be "historical" in the c/e debate any longer. SO NOW I might be able to suppose not only that Croizat might INDEED have found diverse ecologies in SIMILAR geographic distributions but that reason minimizes the SPACE on earth not the clade differences between puntuated equilibriums and generalized punctuations! This will likely find that it was evolution theorists and not creationists that make prohibitive futher eduction of the dominion of this boundary of ecosystems!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by TheLiteralist, posted 12-04-2004 3:48 PM TheLiteralist has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 251 of 254 (167707)
12-13-2004 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 247 by TheLiteralist
12-07-2004 2:37 PM


Re: DNA Doesn't Make Proteins?
Some of the confusion seems to be that Dr. Gladsyhev's analysis of CHEMISTRY is not appreciated as much as I, BSM, promote it to be.
I think Georgi is DEAD ON with his;
quote:
Thus, the aforementioned concepts by Boltzmann, Schrdinger, Prigogine, and their followers turned out to be at best tentative ones, or even a dead end. They hampered for many decades the search for the ways to explaining the evolution of living systems in physicochemical terms on the basis of the second law of thermodynamics. As noted above, only in recent decades were the principles of hierarchical thermodynamics (macrothermodynamics) formulated. I have managed to extend Gibbs's methodology so that it might be used for creating the physical (physicochemical) theories of the origin of life, biological evolution, and aging of living organisms [17, 22—28].
This might be able to give you an idea as to where in the environment the info is coming from! The full text is linked here
EvC Forum: GP Gladyshev's paper (s)or mine?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by TheLiteralist, posted 12-07-2004 2:37 PM TheLiteralist has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Percy, posted 12-13-2004 6:09 PM Brad McFall has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 253 of 254 (168085)
12-14-2004 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by Percy
12-13-2004 6:09 PM


Re: Off-topic Inquiry
Yes,
& as soon as I get an internet picture host, I will start using more legible versions with my posts. The picture is my blueprint for a means to experimentally determine theromostat parameters modifying current electrolytic reaction devices. The "scrawl" is not legible on this public commputer but with my laptop you can make it all out except for the comment that the diagram might need to be inserted into a centrifuge to actually apply ( I was uncertain if gravity needed to be taken into account). Regardless the top two figures are quick sketchs of Faraday's and Thompson's devices for measuring thermal currents and the increasing "white" area is a prediction of mine as to where in this apparatus (if working) coupling rather than oxidation and reducation rxns are most probably to occur.
I dont think I am going to get into avatar switching but I will put out some more drawings. In particular I made a drawing of what I consider to be what Georgi DEMONSTRATED in his latest paper (monohierarchy within a biological polyheirarchy) and on reading his paper over, I began to wonder if limb buds might not be causal with this CLOSED materiality (my poly heirarchy was restricted to those that display a normal distribution).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Percy, posted 12-13-2004 6:09 PM Percy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024